Speaker 1: What are the biggest bombshells in the latest Russiagate document dump,
Who are the media co conspirators still covering up the hoax?
And what does the Scottie Scheffler Buzz teach us about
America's ongoing vibe shift. All that and more on the
Kylie Cast. Hi, everybody, and welcome to the Kylie Cast.
I'm Kylie Griswold, Managing editor at The Federalist. Be sure
to like and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts, and
if you're just listening, go check out the full video
version of the show on my personal YouTube channel or
the Federalist channel on Rumble. As always, you can email
the show at radio at the Federalist dot com. I
would love to hear from you, you know what. I
am shocked, shocked, I tell you, it really is just
so hard to believe that explosive news news broke this
week about a nearly decades long Democrat manufactured hoax, and
the media, well, they just don't think there's anything worth covering.
That's so out of character for them, isn't it not.
I'm talking, of course, about Russiagate, the conspiracy theory cooked
up by Hillary Clinton the DNC and Obama's intel agencies
that Donald Trump conspired with Vladimir Putin to steal the
twenty sixteen election. Now, we've known for years, thanks to
rigorous reporting from the likes of Molly Hemingway and Marco
Cleveland at the Federalist, that Russiagate is nothing but a
giant hoax, one that damaged the country in ways we
can't even begin to comprehend. It hamstrung the duly elected
President of the United States, Donald Trump, It wasted hundreds
of millions of taxpayer dollars, It screwed up our foreign policy,
It led to a pointless and wasteful Special Council investigation,
and it completely destroyed any remaining credibility of US intel agencies,
just to name a few of its many consequences. But
thanks to newly released documents from Tulci Gabberd, the Director
of National Intelligence, and John Radcliffe, the director of the CIA,
we now know how the hoagues got started. Specifically, we
know definitively that Barack Obama and his top intel officials
not only whipped up a fake intelligence assessment to claim
Trump was conspiring with Russia to steal the twenty sixteen election,
but that they had consistent and reliable intel showing the
exact opposite, that there was no Russia collusion and that
Putin did not interfere in the election to help Donald Trump,
and they buried this intel. We also know that the
corporate media basically acted as Democrats stenographers in immediately running
with Obama's fake narrative, despite the fake intel assessment not
even having been cooked up yet. Then this past Wednesday,
Tulsi Gabbert declassified more documents, this time from a House
Intel staff report. These new documents show, among other things,
that then CIA Director John Brennan revived the completely discredited
and Clinton funded Steele dossier and forced it to be
included in that final and fake Intelligence Community assessment. In fact,
other senior CIA professionals warned Brennan that the fake dossier
should be kept out of the intelligence assessment, but Brennan
rejected those requests and included it anyway. Now, maybe you're
sick of hearing about the Russia collusion hoax and just
wish it would die already. I mean, why should anybody
really care anymore? Trump won reelection and the bad actors,
including Barack Obama, John Brennan, James Comey, James Clapper, Joe Biden,
Susan Rice, et cetera. They're mostly gone, right, so can't
we just move on? First of all, even if Obama, Brennan, Comy, Clapper,
and Biden don't have nearly the influence and positioning they
once did, they're not really gone. Remember that during the
twenty twenty election, Clapper and Brennan were two of the
more than fifty former Intel officials who characterized Hunter Biden's
laptop as Russian disinformation to help swing the election away
from Donald Trump to Joe Biden. And then just this summer,
James Comy posted and then pretended not to know what
eighty six forty seven meant in what could credibly be
considered a call for violence or at least more sedition
against Trump. All of these hoaxers should be on their
way to prison for using their power to orchestrate a
partisan coup. But even if this list of hoaxers just
keeps fading into oblivion, the problem is that almost all
of their media co conspirators are still there, and in fact,
they're still cashing in on their Russia hoaxing. The Washington
Post New York Times, CNN, Politico, and The Atlantic have
faced zero accountability for their untold lives. Jake Tapper still
lectures from his lucrative perch at CNN and just published
a ridiculous new book, Fusion. Natasha Bircher and Charlie Savage
are still peddling fake news, including the recent Horsepucky about
Trump's Iran strike from the former and Biden's autopen from
the latter. Margaret Brennan still at CBS. From Rachel Maddow
to Kendalanian to Adam Goldman to David Korn, the list
goes on and on and on. All of these seditious
co conspirators in the Russia hoaks are still churning out
regime propaganda every day and are being rewarded with bylines,
TV contracts, Pulitzer prizes, and the ability to control the
flow of information to the American people. The worst part
is because they control the narrative, they can also ensure
that nobody from their ranks ever faces accountability, and all
they have to do is pretend there's nothing to see.
The anti trumpers from ostensibly conservative outlets like National Review
are no help. Of course, when people like Andy McCarthy
go out and pretend there's nothing to see here. All
it does is enable the rest of the corporate media
complex to use oose National Review as a foil see
even National Review says there's nothing to see here, even
though we know full well that the legacy media would
never have covered it anyway, because again they're co conspirators.
So of course there's been a media blackout on the
latest bombshell reports, a collective yawn on what should be
the biggest story of the week, for sure, and frankly
the decade, the Sunday shows refused to cover it. Print
media did the same thing, and if they covered it
at all, they downplayed it dramatically or completely lied about it.
Here are just a few of the headlines. CBS Trump's
intel chief Tulsea Gabbard reignites political battles with twenty sixteen
election documents on Russia. Here's CNN quote it's just wildly
misleading end quote. Why the administration's latest allegations about the
Russia investigation don't add up. And that quote in the
headline came from you guessed it, an anonymous congressional source.
Here's NBC. Trump's intelligence chief try to rewrite the history
of the twenty sixteen election. Insane headline, ABC. Trump rehashes
years old grievances on Russia investigation after new intelligence report.
Here's the New York Times. Gabbard releases new documents targeting
Obama administration. Just insane framing from the corporate media. Meanwhile,
the Washington Post obscured Friday's news under this egregious headline
quote as Magaworld focuses on Epstein, Trump seeks focus on
anything else end quote. Glenn Kessler's piece on the matter
downplayed Gabbard's claims as based on quote thin gruel. The
New York Times is Friday article about Gabbert's report buried
the details, leading instead with Democrats' objections, as if the
most important story is what democrats have to say about
the news. And PR characterized the report as an attempt
quote at scrutinizing year's old intelligence community conclude usions about
Russian interference in the twenty sixteen US presidential election years old,
like it doesn't matter anymore. It has the same flavor
as NPR's statement about why it refused to cover the
Biden family corruption scandal that blew up thanks to Hunter's
laptop right before the twenty twenty election. That's when NPR said, quote,
we don't want to waste our time on stories that
are not really stories, and we don't want to waste
the listeners in readers' time on stories that are just
pure distractions. Give me a break once again. The media
will do everything in their power to convince you that
expose's about the Russia hoax that they eagerly participated in
are just pure distractions, but they're anything but. The corrupt
media's credibility has been tanking four years and for good reason.
But this latest media malfeasance and their seditious co conspiracy
in Russia Gate should serve as a reminder that you
shouldn't believe a single word they say because they don't
exist to report the news. They exist clearly to help Democrats,
even if that means consistently covering up or obscuring the
biggest news stories. Unlike the corrupt media, we are going
to cover the news. So here to join me now
is The Federalist's senior legal correspondent, Margot Cleveland to share
the biggest bombshells from this new intelligence report. Margo, thanks
so much for joining me.
Speaker 2: Thanks so much for having me.
Speaker 1: Oh, you bet. You have done excellent reporting on the
Russia hoax for years, so you've really been in the
thick of it. What are the biggest bombshells you've found
in Friday's document release or Wednesdays and specifically, can you
tell us what you learned about exactly how the hoax
got started?
Speaker 3: Sure, so let's just kind of put it in perspective
that what we're talking about now is after Trump was elected.
So before Trump was elected, we had the whole Russia
conspiracy theory that he was in Putin's back pocket. All
that was going on. But now Trump is elected, and
the question is what happens next. Well, Obama and the
same folks that were pushing the Russia gate, the crossfire hurricane,
went in with what I would say the kind of
they came in with a new flank to again try
to sink Trump. And this started with Obama telling the
Director of National Intelligence so that would have been Clapper,
that he wanted him to do an assessment of Russia's
involvement in the twenty sixteen election. And this happened on
a December fifth, so a little bit a month like
a month after the election, and it was done apparently
in an oral briefing, and then after that they started
to have a discussion about how they were going to
do this assessment. So one thing that's important to keep
in mind, and this is.
Speaker 2: Coming from a whole bunch.
Speaker 3: Of different information that's been released recently. So we have Ratcliffe,
our current CIA director, who released a report about the
intelligence assessment about Russia.
Speaker 2: We also have the D and I.
Speaker 3: So the Director of National Intelligence, Gabby Chelsea Gabbert, who
released some declassified information that also dealt with that, and
then just today we had a release of the Hipsie
report on it. All of this together showed that what
happened was Obama asked for this assessment. While he was
asking for this assessment about Russia and everything that happened
in the twenty sixteen election, the intelligence community was wrapping
up another assessment. It came out and said Russia didn't
hack the election. So these two things are going in tandem.
Speaker 2: And you have.
Speaker 3: A named source who, in the Gabert release from Friday,
said well.
Speaker 2: We still need to do this briefing.
Speaker 3: It was a presidential daily brief that was talking about
what the intelligence community had concluded about whether or not
Russia hacked the election, and until that Thursday afternoon, so
I think it was December eighth, It might have been
December ninth. I think it was December eighth, but it
was a Thursday. Everybody expected that briefing.
Speaker 2: To go out.
Speaker 3: But at the same time we have Clapper coming in
and Brendan coming in and deciding to do this rush
assessment that Obama had just ordered. He ordered it to
be done with very few people involved, to be done
within like three weeks so before Trump got in. And
what Obama had done is he had charged Clapper with
coming to a Friday National security meeting with basically an
outline of what this assessment would look like.
Speaker 2: So we have these two balls kind of in the air.
Speaker 3: And what happened is on Thursday, at the end of
the day, all of a sudden, out of the blue,
the Office of National Intelligence came out and said, we're
not going to put out this presidential brief that says
Russia did not hack the election.
Speaker 1: That I'm wing was consistent with the intelligence that had
been up to that point, right, I mean, that was
a consistent finding that Russia did not hack the election.
It was only after that that suddenly we got Russia, Russia, Russia,
which was not consistent with the prevailing narrative up until
that point, or prevailing intelligence. I should say. I also
wanted to ask you about on that point the presidential
daily briefs that would have come out and said that, yeah,
Russia did not hack the election at this point, because
it's in December, this is after Donald Trump is the
president elect, and so he would have been privy to
that brief at that point, correct, which is an important
point here.
Speaker 3: Yes, absolutely he would have been privy, and in fact,
Michael Flynn, who was the incoming national I think dn
I he said, I was getting these presidential briefs already,
so he would have gotten this information which would have
given Trump the actual intel to push back about the Russia, Russia, Russia.
I do want to talk about this just for a
minute too, because you are seeing the media completely ignore
this story by saying, well, nobody thought the election was hacked.
Speaker 2: Actually, like, what is it?
Speaker 3: Sixty percent of Democrats actually thought Russia came in and
switched the vote.
Speaker 2: I don't remember if it was sixty fifty four. It
was a huge number, and you.
Speaker 3: Had Democrats starting to push that hoax, and they didn't
necessarily do it like, oh, they came in and they took.
Speaker 2: Over the computer.
Speaker 3: They used this kind of vague language that created this inference.
Speaker 2: Even Obama did it. So for people who are saying that, oh,
this is.
Speaker 3: A nothing burger, that's a bunch of bologny, it's a
huge thing.
Speaker 2: That they buried it because not only did.
Speaker 3: It refute just the whole idea of Russia being involved,
but they started this secondary theory.
Speaker 2: That there was actually hacking going on. So it was huge.
Speaker 3: It would have been Trump, Flynn as well as his
other folks that would have known it. And this is
also a key point of the timing. And this came
from the release from HIPSY today.
Speaker 1: So the House howse Intel Oversight?
Speaker 3: Sorry, yeah, how is Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence?
Speaker 1: Yes, thank you?
Speaker 2: So I always have to remember that too.
Speaker 3: So HIPSY issued a big report on the ICA, so
this Intelligence Community Assessment, Intelligence Community Assessment that Obama had written,
and one of the things that they found is the
reason this rush mattered is the only people who were
having any impact on it were the Obama people, and
the only people who could make decisions on whether or
not something would go in were the Obama people, and
the Obama people were briefing the Senate on it. So
that's another thing the media is doing right now. They
are continuing and I think I posted this yesterday. I
can't believe they're continuing to say Russia wanted Trump to
win because we now know that that intelligence was fake
and they're pointing to, well, the Senate at this briefing,
and the Senate it's like, yeah, because Brennan did this,
because Obama told him to do it, and it was
fake from day one.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's where all.
Speaker 3: Of these intelligence reports that have come out are providing
us as detail.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so I want to ask you about this Hipsie
report from Wednesday. So there were professionals within the CIA,
like top professionals. Molly reported on this at the Federalist
this week, and these top CIA officials objected to the
Russia collusion lies and specifically the bogus Steele dossier being
included in the final ICA, the Final Intelligence Community Assessment.
But John Brennan, who is then the CIA director, forced
those lies in anyway. And Sean Davis had a really
great tweet on this explaining that basically they created multiple
versions of the ICA, one that went to Congress, one
that went to the public, and one that went to
the Obama administration. And the ones that went to the
public and Congress did not include the Steele dossier in
the body of this. That's maybe where it was included
as an annex, but then it was in the body
of the Obama ICA. And so the idea is, you know,
the people saying, oh, the Steele dossier was not relied
on at all, it absolutely was. This was like a
primary thing. And so can you speak to what kind
of tricks the hoax organizers used to keep internal critics
like these top CIA officials from being able to fight
these lies from Brennan and others more effectively.
Speaker 3: So one of the things they did is they didn't
give them access to it, so they in fact, it
wasn't until December twentieth that they even knew about the
dossier and that these people wanted it and.
Speaker 2: Included in it.
Speaker 3: Then other people who were writing it still didn't even
get to see that.
Speaker 2: They didn't get to see what Steele had written on it.
Speaker 3: And then beyond that, they didn't have really any say
in it. When they went through it to say whether
or not that this was good bad.
Speaker 2: So there was a lot of objections to including it.
But one of the things that the Hipsie report from
today did is.
Speaker 3: Not just did it go and say, yes, the dossier
was in it and it was inappropriate.
Speaker 2: I think one of the most.
Speaker 3: Shocking revelations is that Brennan went back and ordered the
creation of three intelligence reports that were then incorporated into
this ica. Those three intelligence reports were based on intel
reporting that they had previously, so the intelligence community had
previously said, no, this is bogus, we don't think that
this is weighty. They didn't even write it up, they
didn't even make it as a report. But now Obama
wants this report to come out about Russia, and Brennan says,
you need to create these three reports based on this
intel that had already been discounted. They relied in the
still dossier, they relied on these three other documents, and
internally the professionalists were saying, this is not white this
information is not screened, it shouldn't be included in it.
And they also misrepresented what those different documents said. So
it wasn't really that they created the reports that shouldn't
have been created.
Speaker 2: And relied on them.
Speaker 3: They created them, and then they inaccurately paraphrased what they
created and put that in there. And on top of
all that, they left out a ton of information that
would have showed that Russia was not trying to get
Trump to win, not just good intell on that, but
logical conclusions such as Russia had all this other Dirda
and Hillary but they didn't release it. Why because Russia
was keeping it in its back pocket for after she
won the election. This report from Hipsie is so damning,
and it goes to the exact same points that Gabbert
and Ratcliffe have released, and that the media is continuing
to ignore and instead of running up this flag about Epstein,
which is just laughable, but they're doing it. They're going
to keep doing it, and it's got to stop.
Speaker 1: That seems to be one of the main themes of
all of this is just reviving already debunked things like
the three reports you're referencing, or the Steele dossier, or
making definitive claims about something that's super vague. There was
one line in particular from the Hipsia report that specifically
mentioned that five different people saw it, meaning five different things.
It was a fragment I think that implied that Putin
had helped Trump or something I forget. Maybe you can
tell me exactly what that line was. I don't recall,
but just the idea that like, we can draw these
definitive statements, or that Brennan could know, you know, with
high degree of confidence that this is what was going on,
and it's like, no, no, there was no confidence about this.
It was all a hack job.
Speaker 3: Right, And I don't remember the exact language, but it
was something to the effect of that Putin anticipated Trump winning.
So it was something like that, and that they converted
that into he wants Trump to win.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 3: But there's another detail in here that was really key.
That Intel came out before the Republican National Convention, before
Trump had gotten the nomination, when there was still this
idea that there was going to be a push to
kind of push Trump out and get a new person in.
And the natural reading of it should have been Trump
is going to be the nominee of the Republicans, He's
going to win that, not.
Speaker 2: That he's going to win the election.
Speaker 3: And so not only did it mean five different things
to five different people, but it totally ignored the context
of when that reding supposedly was made.
Speaker 2: That would have given you.
Speaker 3: A totally different view of what Putin was actually saying there.
Speaker 1: Right right, So switching gears just a little bit. I
know there's been a lot of chatter about the Statute
of limitations on potential crimes here. Do you think we
will ever see anyone held accountable? I mean, do you
think these criminal referrals to the DOJ will actually materialize
into anything?
Speaker 2: So?
Speaker 3: I do think that there are going to be charges.
I think that they will charge a conspiracy. I think
they're going to be creative. I think because it's a conspiracy,
they'll charge it outside of DC. I don't know whether
we're going to get a conviction out of it. I
look at it two ways, that we Americans are the accountability.
Whether someone goes to jail or not, we still have
the power to hold them accountable, and by them.
Speaker 2: I don't just.
Speaker 3: Need Obama, Brennan, Comy Struck. I also mean every member
of the media who went along with this. We can
hold them accountable. And in a sense we already did.
We elected Trump. Now this information is coming out, history
will no longer allow for all these lives that have
been going on and I want to say this very
strikingly a decade. This has been going on for a decade,
and we are now just learning some of these details.
Speaker 2: So yes, I think we're going to have indictments.
Speaker 3: Whether it results in convictions, I don't know, but we
will have accountability as long as we as Americans demand it,
either because we will refuse to give these people the
time of day. They will go down as Nixon, worse
than Nixon in history books, and we just will not
tolerate this from the media anymore either.
Speaker 1: Right right, Yeah, And I think that gets to the
heart of what normal Americans should take away from this
news because I think, you know, for people who have
been reporting on the Russia hoax for the better part
of a decade, it's easy to see what these developments
mean for them, or for you know, people in Washington,
d C. But for normia Americans, you know, who may
not remember who Michael Flynn is or they don't remember
who who John Brennan is or any of these key players,
there's still a main takeaway for them, and that is
the accountability point. And I think the hard thing though
for many Americans is you know, Trump's first election should
have been an indictment of the media and an indictment
of the deep state and an indictment of you know,
our corrupt intel agencies. And instead his entire first term
was hampered by this. And so while I think, you know,
his twenty twenty four election definitely is a step in
the way of accountability, there's still so much more that
normi Americans want to see done, like you know, criminal
charges and people actually going to prison. Yeah, Margo, last
thirty seconds. To you anything else that you want to add.
Speaker 3: I would just say that we are still just at
the time top of the iceberg.
Speaker 2: There is so.
Speaker 3: Much more that is coming out, so many more players
that we don't know everything that happened. But for the
first time, I feel confident we're going to get this information,
Ratcliffe gabbered Pamp Bondie. All of these folks are now
releasing this information. They now know who the bad guys are.
They're either getting them out fired or they're keeping them
to the side so that this cannot happen again.
Speaker 1: Well said, Thanks so much, Margo, appreciate your insights and
you're welcome back here anytime. Thanks so much for joining me, Oh,
thanks for having me.
Speaker 4: The Federal Reserve Offices in DC are getting an extreme
Soviet makeover. The Watched Out on Wall Street podcast with
Chris Markowski. Every day Chris helps unpack the connection between
politics and the economy and how it affects your wallet.
The Federal Reserve Offices are getting a two point five
billion dollar renovation. For perspective, Jerry Jones built Cowboys Stadium
for one point five billion. Whether it's happening in DC
or down on Wall Street, it's affecting you financially. Be informed.
Check out the Watchdout on Wall Street podcast with Chris
Markowski on Apples, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 1: All right, time for a little culture. I don't know
if you've been following this week's sports news, but you
should be. And no, I'm not talking about WNBA players
demanding to be paid what they're owed, even though the
league is on track to lose fifty million dollars this
year and has literally never turned a profit. No, the
sports news this week is about golfer Scottie Scheffler winning
the Open Championship, which is his fourth career major. Very impressive. Specifically,
there was this precious moment after Scheffler won the trophy,
where his baby son Bennett joined him on the green.
Check it out that he's got a.
Speaker 2: Couple of interviews to do here.
Speaker 5: This guy's sports first. Bennett is on a loose.
Speaker 4: Very comes.
Speaker 5: No, it's not easy of those slopes. The first time
learner right there, feeling that finnismin grew up with a
lot of.
Speaker 4: Hardware around him.
Speaker 1: This wasn't just a quiet, fleeting moment praised only by conservatives,
which is probably what you would have expected. Instead, it
appears to be the latest indicator of a serious cultural
vibe shift sweeping across American sports, Hollywood, corporate priorities, comedy, politics,
you name it. Right after the victory, Nike, of all companies,
ran an advertisement that recognized Scheffler's dad's status as an
even greater win than a golf major. The first image
of the ad shows Scheffler kneeling on the golf course
with his son, captioned You've already won, and then a
second image shows Scheffler swinging a club with the caption
but another major never hurt.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 1: It's a simple thing, But the corporate advertisement rightly orders
career including huge career accomplishments as subordinate to the responsibility
and joy of fatherhood. You know, it wasn't all that
long ago that Nike was running ads like this, glorifying
America hating athletes like former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick, who
turned his entire failed athletic career into a racial grift
after disrespecting the flag and national anthem throughout the twenty
sixteen season and then remaining unsigned in twenty seventeen. Nike
lionized Kaepernick in twenty eighteen with a melodramatic ad reading quote,
believe in something, even if it means sacrificing everything. Then
just this past February, Nike ran a pointless, bitter feminist
commercial during the Super Bowl that was so ridiculous it's
not even worth rehashing here. So now it's quite a
vibe shift to praise fatherhood as the ultimate win. But
it's not just Nike. A piece at The Federalist this
week by Josh Wood points out that this is a trend.
The car company Volvo ran a super pro life pro
family commercial earlier this year that showed the excitement and
emotion and stakes of bringing new life into the world
and a recent Apple ad similarly celebrated the beautiful relationship
between fathers and daughters. Josh Wood writes, quote brands are
no longer selling shock, They're selling something radical in today's climate,
They're selling normal end quote. And you can see this
almost everywhere. As soon to be released Lana Delray song
promotes the beauty of traditional marriage. John Bellian's incredible new album,
Father Figure, explores the superiority of marriage and family over
fame and fortune. His song My Boy, about his son,
stresses the importance of present fathers and includes in its
outro a beautiful recording of his son singing Jesus Loves Me.
Movies like Top Gun Maverick are massively popular, while flicks
like The Horrible New Snow White and woke TV shows
like Star Wars The Acolyte are huge flops. And consider
the resurgence of anti woke comedy and the fact that ESPN,
which is owned by Disney, just had previously canceled Write
Coded comedian Shane Gillis host its annual awards show. As
Rich Cromwell wrote of Gillis's monologue at the Federalist quote,
while the audience didn't enthusiastically respond to most of Gillis's
opening monologue. The fact that Disney and ESPN chose to
go with him and with pre written and thus preapproved jokes,
shows they're starting to play catch up to the rest
of society. End quote. I mean, just look at the
subdued nature of Pride Month this year, the slow retreat
from DEI, the popularity of podcasters who are willing to
say the quiet part out loud, the canning of Stephen Colbert,
the huge enrollment surgeon homeschooling in Christian schools, and of
course the rejection of Kamala Harris and the reelection of
Donald Trump. This isn't to say the battle is over
or that there aren't constant exceptions to the rules, obviously.
I mean, for every company that retreats from DEI, another
one just gets sneakier about it. And Nike can make
all the pro family ads at once, but it's still
using slave labor in China and will probably grace us
with another garbage ad any day now. But Americans are
clearly ready for a return to normalcy. They're rejecting all
the garbage that's been shoved down their throats for the
past decade or so, and our cultural betters know it.
Josh Wood explains it this way quote. For years, we've
been force fed a diet of corporate sloganeering, social experiments,
and astroturfed ideology. The commercials, the award shows, the children's programming.
It all felt like a coordinated effort to deconstruct everything
normal and call it progress. Like we've been running a
high stakes experiment on what happens when you remove every
natural boundary and mock every traditional norm. And while not
everyone has the vocabulary to explain why it feels off,
most Americans sense it deeply. The results are in. The
people are tired. End quote. That's why the Scheffler Dad
moment was so awesome. It was just another phony corporate
lecture or political performance drummed up by some out of
touch strategist. It was an image of the wholesomeness and
normalcy that so many Americans are desperate for. Political strategists
in Hollywood and the corporate media have created an alternate
reality where up is down and boys are girls and
wrong is right, and Scheffler represents a reality check that
what's always been good and true and beautiful is still
all of those things. But at the end of the day,
Americans aren't just hungry for the fulfillment of traditional family life.
They're spiritually hungry too, And while that's not something Nike's
going to dive into headfirst, it is something else that
Scheffler is very outspoken about. Josh Wood rightly notes in
his piece that Scheffler's press conferences often sound more like
Ecclesiastes than espn here's a peak.
Speaker 3: Yeah, this is.
Speaker 6: Amazing to win the Open Championship, But at the end
of the day, having success in life, whether it be
in golf or work or whatever it is, that's not
what fulfills the deepest desires of your heart. Am I
and grateful word? Do I enjoy it? Oh my gosh, Yeah,
this is a cool feeling. I can't wait to get
home and celebrate this, this championship, you know, with the
people that have kind of helped me along the way.
But at the end of the day, it doesn't fulfill
the deepest desires in my heart. You know, just because
you win a golf tournament accomplished them, that doesn't make
you happy. As priorities are my faith in my family,
you know, those come first for me, golf is third
in that you know, in that order, and I've said
it for a long time. Golf is not how identify myself.
I don't identify myself by winning tournaments, chasing trophies, you know,
being famous or whatever it is like.
Speaker 1: Success is fleeting, striving is vain, but faith in Jesus
is something that sustains, something that lasts passed the two
minute hype of winning a championship or getting a promotion,
or even seeing your child past their next milestone. Everybody's
looking for meaning. It's something Joe Rogan, among many other people,
talks about a lot, the fear that has more jobs
are taken over by artificial intelligence and more people come
to rely on the g government for everything, their meaning disappears,
and in many many ways, Joe Rogan is not wrong.
Human beings were created in the image of God to
create and be productive and be reproductive. Work is super important,
no matter what your hand finds to do, do it
with all your might, Ecclesiastes says. But Ecclesiastes also tells
us that working for the sake of working is striving
after the wind. That's why Scotti Scheffler has the real
key to meaning figured out. It isn't found in golf
or work or fame. It's not even only found in
his wife and child. Ultimately, it's found in a saving
relationship with the God of the universe through faith in Jesus,
and with that you can never lose. All Right, that's
going to do it for me today. Thanks so much
for tuning into the Kyli cast I will be right
back here next week with more. In the meantime, just
remember the truth hurts, but it won't kill us.